While I get your point, I think this is misguided. Impeachment in the House is not where this type of fairness gets applied, because this is like a prosecutor bringing together a grand jury. Targets of a grand jury indictment are not given rights of equal time, etc. They are not allowed to call their own witness before the grand jury. It is a one-sided process by design and by logic. The trial is where the accused - once they are accused - are given their rights.
It's also worth noting that perjury is NOT when the prosecutors ask you for your alibi and you say it was Tuesday two years ago but it was really Wednesday. Mere but actual slips of memory do not lead to a charge of perjury. Perjury = "The crime of willfully and knowingly making a false statement about a material fact while under oath."
The only hope is for public opinion to try to move McConnell. If you think the odds of that are very low, the cost of doing so until the beginning of next year is very low, too. We don't know if Pelosi will wait much longer.
Who said "guilty forever?" It's "not exonerated" forever.
In general - forget about Trump for a second - do you think it's good to have the greatest troll in human history, who doesn't give a flying ****, be the POTUS?
I think you will fail to find a precedent or an existing law that allows a blanket, absolute claim to withhold all testimony and all documents related to impeachment from Congress. (If Trump had claimed executive privilege for specific witnesses or documents, on specified grounds, you'd have something. )
Because the Republicans want the next official act of this drama to be acquitting Trump.
I suppose if one only pays attention to what the Republicans say, there is no chance of the Democrats ever controlling the narrative. On the other hand, doing what McConnell has been doing all along (pretending that bills he doesn't like don't exist and thus never dealing with them) both prolongs the impeachment process (driving Trump to continue ranting and raving about it) and invites people to ask why Pelosi is doing it and perhaps finding out her actual reasons.
Bringing charges is not the point in the process in which the accused have their day in court (mostly because they aren't accused when the inquiry is going on). The House investigating impeachment articles is like a prosecutor going to a grand jury, and the subject of a grand jury indictment is NOT entitled to, for instance, bring in their own witnesses, etc. That's what the trial is for.
That doesn't mean that Trump didn't commit impeachable offenses. If it did, then any president who could point out someone saying he should be impeached early in his presidency could then commit impeachable offense and claim your point as a defense.
I think we can agree that, even in the best circumstances, democracy will be a messy business.
I meant in general, without regard to Trump. Your referencing Hillary still keeps it in regard to Trump.
